More clarity is the positive that should come from StarCaps case

From the beginning it has been an uphill battle for NFL players involved in the StarCaps case, a list that includes Saints defensive ends Charles Grant and Will Smith and former Saints running back Deuce McAllister. From the beginning the likelihood was strong that they'd have to serve a four-game suspension without pay for using a banned diuretic in 2008, in violation of the league's drug policy.

Still, the five players (Vikings defensive linemen Pat Williams and Kevin Williams are the other two) appealed, supported by the NFL Players Association, hoping for a favorable judgment that isn't likely to come.

But if it leads to more clarification and a better understanding of what can and can't be taken, it all will have been worth it. If it prevents players from finding themselves in a similar predicament in the future, it will have been worth it.

The argument, basically, is whether the NFL knew more than it shared with the players, whether the league knew the banned substance (bumetanide) was in StarCaps and failed to inform players who believed they'd taken the necessary precautions.

True, some issues surrounding the suspensions of Kevin Williams and Pat Williams were sent by U.S. District Judge Paul Magnuson to the Minnesota state courts. But Magnuson denied a request to put the suspensions on hold while the case is being appealed, and the likelihood that they'll win - based partially on the claim that Minnesota employers are prohibited from disciplining employees for using a legal substance off site during nonworking hours - seems remote.

"If the players' union and the league has agreed, 'OK, here is the drug-testing protocol, here are the rules and the sanctions, here are how disputes are going to be resolved,' then there shouldn't be one set of rules under state law for players in Minnesota, Louisiana, California, Ohio, etc.," said Matt Mitten, a professor and director of the national sports law institute at Marquette.

"I suspect that the Minnesota state law doesn't apply here," Mitten said. "That would be consistent with how courts have ruled in the past."

But that doesn't mean the players' fight hasn't been worth it and that their continued fight won't be worth it.

First, their names don't appear to be nearly as sullied as they were originally, when the reflexive deduction was they were trying to hide something or were pleading ignorance while knowing full well that they should have known every detail about what they were taking. No one believes these were cheaters who were using performance-enhancing drugs and trying to hide it.

Second, their action may lead to even more clarity with regard to the NFL's drug policy because, apparently, there remains some vagueness to the rules.

If that's the only new thing that comes of this, given that the four-game suspensions pretty much appear to be a lock, then at least that positive will have been drawn from the experience.